drunkenfool
Member
Registered: 7th Feb 03
Location: Hereford Drives: Audi R8 V8
User status: Offline
|
Not been caught again or anything, but just read this on another forum and it might come in handy 
just read this on another forum
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A simple letter using legal wording has opened up a new route to get speeding charges dropped, according to experts. The statement is at the centre of a high court appeal to be heard this summer. but for now police forces accross the country are dropping cases when it has been used. People accused of speeding have been simply been sending in the statement in response to NOTICES OF PROSECUTION (NIPS).
Speed cameras rely on a law requiring you to say who was driving your car at the time of the alledged offence. Not saying who it was will lead to a charge of withholding information under section 172 of the road traffic act, While admitting to being the driver will lead to a fixed penalty for speeding.
But another law says that before suspects are questioned about an offence they should receive a formal caution - and no caution is given when a speeding notice is delivered through the post.
The standard statement below, is designed to accompany an admission to being the driver. It points out that, since no caution has been given, the admission cannot be used as evidence in court.
Specialist road traffic lawyer Robert Dobson whos clients case is to be heard by the high court says " In English law there's a requirement that if a statement is going to be used against somebody, that person has to be cautioned under section 78 of the police and criminal evidence act. If a caution hasn't been given, then the argument runs that anything that's said cannot be used as evidence in court. We've complied with section 172 of the road traffic act by identifying the driver. But what we are saying is that we're not going to allow that information to be then used against us. Any charge under section 172 must fail as we have complied. And if any charge is brought for speeding we'll say how do you know who was driving?"
The loophole letter called the PACE Witness Statement is a catch 22 for police and camera partnerships according to Dobson.
Even though someone has admitted to being the driver, that admission can't be used against him as he didn't recieve a caution. If an officer then visits him to issue a caution then only statements after said caution can be used and the caution gives the right to silence.
Forces have dropped cases all over the country. very few people who have used this letter have been convicted. The met and many more forces have not issued summons to anybody who has sent the statement back.
Remember different forces reach different decisions and there is no guarrantee that a case will be dropped.
THE PACE WITNESS STATEMENT
If your car is snapped speeding you will be sent a notice of intended prosecution asking who was driving. If it was you and you want to respond with a PACE statement fill out the form by writing "Please see the attached" where it asks for details. Then attach a letter with the standard wording shown below.
[INSERT THEIR REFERENCE NUMBER HERE]
[INSERT YOUR REGISTRATION NUMBER HERE]
DEAR CHIEF CONSTABLE.
Further to the above Notice of Intended Prosecution, I confirm That the following individual was driving the above vehicle at the time of the alledged motoring offence.
[INSERT ALL THE DETAILS ASKED FOR ON THE NIP HERE, INCLUDING NAME ADDRESS, DATE OF BIRTH AND DRIVER NUMBER]
As this statement is provided under the threat of criminal penalty (funke v France) and as I have not received the caution required by paragraph 10.1 of PACE Code C (Mawdesley v the Chief Constable of Cheshire (2004) 1 All E.R.58 ), I make this statement on the express understanding that it shall not be used or disclosed in any proceedings of whatever nature against myself.
Yours Sincerely
[INSERT YOUR SIGNATURE HERE]
[INSERT YOUR NAME IN PRINT HERE]
looks and sounds complicated but basically they can't use your details in court because noone said "you have the right to remain silent" and all that to you before they sent the letter out to you.
this was in motorcycle news and can be found at www.pepipoo.com which is an anti speed camera campaigners website which is funding the high court appeal.
It might work it might not, but if it saves you £60 and 3 points why not try it
|
andy1868
Member
Registered: 22nd Jun 06
Location: Burscough, Lancashire
User status: Offline
|
this should be made a sticky if it actually works imo 
|
Butler
Member
Registered: 2nd Jun 05
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
Personally I think if people are speeding then they shouldnt fuck with the law and just pay the fine because they deserve it quite frankly
|
JadeM
Premium Member
Registered: 9th Feb 06
User status: Offline
|
This is not new PACE loophole has been known & used to get away with fines for a while.....apparently it does work, unfortunatelly not in Scotland as laws different here!!
|
JadeM
Premium Member
Registered: 9th Feb 06
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Butler
Personally I think if people are speeding then they shouldnt fuck with the law and just pay the fine because they deserve it quite frankly
I got a nip for doing 84mph on the motorway....hardly fucking with the law I was safely overtaking an HGV. Needless to say I still havnt recieved points or a summons & this occured in January 
|
Wrighty
Member
Registered: 28th Feb 04
Location: Howden
User status: Offline
|
will this work with traffic light cameras 
|
JadeM
Premium Member
Registered: 9th Feb 06
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wrighty
will this work with traffic light cameras
Maybe
Useful site - http://forums.pepipoo.com
Bit to read on PACE - http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=7021
|
Wrighty
Member
Registered: 28th Feb 04
Location: Howden
User status: Offline
|
shoot, iv already sent me first form off..now iv got the 2nd form..
doubt its going to work isit
|
JadeM
Premium Member
Registered: 9th Feb 06
User status: Offline
|
Its a bit sneaky...but can get you off, could also backfire & get you a day in court & bigger fine!!!
|
j10E W
Member
Registered: 30th Sep 04
Location: maidstone
User status: Offline
|
i was going to try this when i got caught speeding decided not to jsut in case it did back fire and got in to more shit
|
Steve
Premium Member
Registered: 30th Mar 02
Location: Worcestershire Drives: Defender
User status: Offline
|
this is old. a solicitor friend informs me it wont work
|
ainsley_brader
Member
Registered: 24th Mar 02
Location: Tattershall, Lincolnshire
User status: Offline
|
getting off speeding i dont have a problem with. But theres no excuse for running a red light!
|
andy1868
Member
Registered: 22nd Jun 06
Location: Burscough, Lancashire
User status: Offline
|
i agree ainsley, although there is always that time when you aren't completely sure if you can stop in time.....
|
Wrighty
Member
Registered: 28th Feb 04
Location: Howden
User status: Offline
|
yes indeed there is
|
SVM 286
Member
Registered: 13th Feb 05
Location: pain
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Butler
Personally I think if people are speeding then they shouldnt fuck with the law and just pay the fine because they deserve it quite frankly
That's all well and good James, but it isn't just a fine is it.
When it comes down to an individual losing their transport for a trifle of an infringement it's quite a different story.
I've got 30 grands worth of still to be paid for, car sat on the drive, uninsurable; due to the actions of an over zealous copper on the M4 back in January. 
|
